Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41267815›Full record

SynthesisFrontiers in artificial intelligence2025

Artificial intelligence for ovarian cancer diagnosis via ultrasound: a systematic review and quantitative assessment of model performance.

Igor Garcia-Atutxa, Francisca Villanueva-Flores, Ekaitz Dudagotia Barrio, Javier I Sanchez-Villamil, José Martínez-Más, Andrés Bueno-Crespo

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Frontiers in artificial intelligence, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Igor Garcia-AtutxaEscuela Politécnica Superior, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain.
Francisca Villanueva-FloresCentro de Investigación en Ciencia Aplicada y Tecnología Avanzada, (CICATA) Unidad Morelos del Instituto Politécnica Nacional (IPN), Xochitepec, Mexico.
Ekaitz Dudagotia BarrioUniversity of Murcia, Murcia, Spain.
Javier I Sanchez-VillamilCentro de Investigación en Ciencia Aplicada y Tecnología Avanzada, (CICATA) Unidad Morelos del Instituto Politécnica Nacional (IPN), Xochitepec, Mexico.
José Martínez-MásFacultad de Medicina, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain.
Andrés Bueno-CrespoEscuela Politécnica Superior, Universidad Católica de Murcia (UCAM), Murcia, Spain.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Early and accurate detection of ovarian cancer (OC) remains clinically challenging, prompting exploration of artificial intelligence (AI)-based ultrasound diagnostics. This systematic review and meta-analysis critically evaluate diagnostic accuracy, methodological rigor, and clinical applicability of AI models for ovarian mass classification using B-mode ultrasound. Methods: A systematic literature search following PRISMA guidelines was conducted in PubMed, IEEE Xplore, and Scopus up to December 2024. Eligible studies included AI-based ovarian mass classification using B-mode ultrasound, reporting accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, and/or area under the ROC curve (AUC). Data extraction, quality assessment (PROBAST), and meta-analysis (random effects) were independently performed by two reviewers. Heterogeneity sources were explored. Results: From 823 identified records, 44 studies met inclusion criteria, covering over 650,000 images. Pooled performance metrics indicated high accuracy (92.3%), sensitivity (91.6%), specificity (90.1%), and AUC (0.93). Automated segmentation significantly outperformed manual segmentation in accuracy and sensitivity, demonstrating standardization benefits and reduced observer variability. Dataset size minimally correlated with performance, highlighting methodological rigor as a primary determinant. No specific AI architecture consistently outperformed others. Substantial methodological heterogeneity and frequent risk-of-bias issues (limited validation, small datasets) currently limit clinical translation. Conclusion: AI models show promising diagnostic performance for OC ultrasound imaging. However, addressing methodological challenges, including rigorous validation, standardized reporting (TRIPOD-AI, STARD-AI), and prospective multicenter studies, is essential for clinical integration. This review provides clear recommendations to enhance clinical translation of AI-based ultrasound diagnostics.

Indexed as

artificial intelligencedeep learningearly detectionmeta-analysisovarian cancersystematic reviewultrasound

Identifiers

PMID41267815
PMCPMC12627067

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.